by Tom Luongo, Tom Luongo:
The “Pentagon Papers’ is making the rounds as the big new event of the past couple of weeks. The controversy is over the ‘leaks’ of strategic briefing documents detailing US future plans for the war in Ukraine. I’ve watched this story unfold with a weather eye but wanted to wait to see how it would progress before commenting.
I know, not going for the click-bait at the height of the anxiety-pimping is a rare thing these days.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
This morning Kit Knightly at Off Guardian put out a strong post on the disinformation process that I believe is worth your time. Even though I disagree with his conclusion, or more precisely leave myself open to a different conclusion, his Disinfo Radar isn’t far off from the calibration zero-point.
This leak has all the hallmarks of being a fake, by Kit’s 5 point heuristic, a heuristic I think has value, just not singular value. This ‘leak’ doesn’t fit this model because of other responses to it. Because in order to sweep it into the corner, it burned the media as information gatekeeper in ways that those with power never do. More on that later.
Black is the new Red
For now let’s focus on the black-pilled, those that live in a perpetual state of cynicism. For them it is easy to just dismiss this event the way Kit does, as something to shift the Overton Window in such a way as to reinforce the narrative they want you engaged in –in this case maneuvering us into supporting another war for globalism.
It’s all content designed, in the parlance of social media, to boost engagement. Because the system has adapted, they don’t manufacture consent anymore – they farm participation. Angry refutation and warm praise record the same in the algorithm. They don’t want your agreement, they want your attention. And when they feel the story is losing the audience, well, here’s some super secret facts you aren’t supposed to know.
This is an excellent point that I agree with, in theory. Yes, they use multiple approaches to move public opinion. Yes, they like to hand out red pills to the normies to give them the cheap dopamine hit of ‘figuring stuff out.’
But, here’s the thing about this type of insight, it’s its own form of psy-op.
Formally identifying this gives the disinformation brokers the flexibility to use both of these techniques (and other techniques) to keep people like Kit and fellow travelers like Whitney Webb and others focused on trying to figure out which one it is.
I hate to single Whitney out here because I genuinely like her and believe she’s an honest broker, but I have to because of her current obsession, Jamie Dimon, which I’ve been asked about by so many people (again, more on that later),
The thing to observe is when they figure it out, they will write, talk and text about it.
It drives traffic, gives positive feedback, and has all the appearance of both real journalism and sincerity (which, by the way, I’m not doubting) but is it for the right reason?
It looks to me like chum for smart people to feel clever and one step ahead of the bad guys. The positive feedback drives subscriber and revenue growth reinforcing the idea of work well done.
But is it really? Or are they just rats chasing the trail laid for them by the cheese mongers?
I say this as someone acutely aware of their own personal tendency to doing just that. It’s not hard to fall down the wrong rabbit hole, obsessed with facts but not what they mean…
This is why all heuristics in an information space as polluted as this one need constant error checking.
Conversing With Tyrants
Uncovering the techniques of control are just uncovering the mechanics. In this case, however, it looks like it is uncovering the agenda, but I don’t think that’s the case here.
Ultimately, it brings to mind Gene Hackman’s ultimate fate in Coppola’s classic movie The Conversation, playing his saxophone in the ruin of his apartment secure he’s satisfied his paranoia.
For all of his skills and brilliance, rather than be an asset, he’s been taken off the board chasing shadows.
That’s the trap of focusing on the what (the corruption) and the how (the mechanisms) but not the why.
This is a serious issue going forward.
Distrusting those with power goes without saying. We’re all operating in this space with this basic drive. No doubt, there. It’s our duty to uncover truths, but it’s also important to question our own frameworks, lest we become reflexive repeaters of the very disinformation we believe we are uncovering.
So, in this case to dismiss the Pentagon Papers as just another control technique may feel right but be completely wrong because it assumes the basic fallacy of this period of history, that there is only one big club vying for control over the West.
The Division Hell
I’ve produced a lot of content making the case for a counter revolution within the US power hierarchy. The basic premise is that as groups approach existential threats to their power and/or position they will react in predictable ways to maintain their power.
It isn’t complicated. But it does mean that corrupt people may act in ways counter to how they reacted previously, forsaking old relationships. I’ve never believed group identity is eternal because I don’t believe cartels are anything other than meta-stable based on mutual coincidence of wants.
